DOCSLIB.ORG

United Kingdom

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

International System Summary: UNITED KINGDOM UIC Map of the United Kingdom’s High-Speed Rail Lines The United Kingdom (UK) is located on an island in GDP of $2.25 trillion, and the GDP per capita of $35,900 Western Europe off the coast of France and Belgium. The ranks 34th in the world. Slightly more than 110 km (70 country’s population of 63 million people ranks 22nd in miles) of high-speed rail line exists in the UK currently, the world. The capital, London, has a population of 8.6 with an additional 200 km (125 miles) planned for future million, with Birmingham the second largest city with 2.3 development. The above map displays the United King- million. Overall, the country is considered mostly urban dom’s high-speed rail network according to the Interna- in nature, with 80 percent of the population residing in tional Union of Railways (UIC). urban areas. The UK has the 9th largest economy with a INTERNATIONAL HIGH-SPEED RAIL SYSTEM SUMMARY: UNITED KINGDOM | 1 SY STEM DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY High-speed rail operations in the UK goes back to 1976, when British Railways commenced operations with a die- sel-electric multiple unit train capable of over 200 km/h (125 mph). Amos et al. (2010) indicates this was the first service capable of those speeds after Japan had implement- ed their high-speed services. Modern high-speed service in the UK began when Section 1 of the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL), now known as High Speed 1 (HS1), opened in 2003 between the Channel Tunnel and Fawkham Junc- tion (south of London). The Channel Tunnel opened in 1994 with the service between the tunnel and London op- Eurostar on the HS1 (the Channel Tunnel rail link) erating on conventional passenger rail line. The new high- speed link reduced the travel time by 20 minutes. The E CONOMICS AND FINANCE HS1 segment provides direct international high-speed rail The construction and operation of the Channel Tunnel service to Paris and Brussels through the Channel Tunnel. Rail Link (now HS1) between the Channel Tunnel and The new link, Section 2, that opened in 2007 fully connects London has a history of private investment, financial diffi- between the Channel Tunnel and London, further reduc- culties, and reorganization. Ernst & Young (2009) provide ing the travel time by an additional 20 minutes. a bulleted list of the history of the HS1 line: • The design, build, finance, and operate concession Prior to the completion of the high-speed link into Lon- contract for the CTRL, the largest of the UK’s private don, the high-speed trains used the Waterloo station, but finance initiative (PFI) projects at the time, was award- upon completion of the Southfleet Junction–London link, ed to London & Continental Railway Limited (LCR) the high-speed trains transferred to the St Pancras Inter- in 1996 and was originally supposed to last until 2086. national station, located in central London. The UK is The brand name HS1 was adopted in 2006. currently planning for the construction of a High Speed 2 • The line was originally planned to be constructed as (HS2) project to connect London with Birmingham with a single project, however, after running into financial high-speed train service in the first section. Additional difficulties in 1998, the CTRL project was restructured sections are under review to extend HS2 in a ‘Y’ configu- and divided into two sections: ration from Birmingham on to Manchester and to Leeds o Section 1 runs 46 miles from the Channel Tunnel (See map on following page). The following table provides portal to Fawkham Junction and cost £1.9 billion. the details of the current and planned high-speed line seg- Section 1 was opened to passenger traffic on time in ments in the UK, which if fully implemented according to 2003 and on budget. table would place over 300 km (almost 200 miles) of high- o Section 2 completed the rail link, feeding a 24-mile speed lines in the UK. HSR from the Southfleet Junction into central Lon- don’s St Pancras Station. It was opened on time and UIC Table of the United Kingdom’s High-Speed Rail Lines on budget in 2007 at a cost of £3.3 billion. Speed Year Length Stage • As part of the 1998 rescue plan it was agreed that, fol- km/h mph Opened km miles In Operation: lowing completion, Section 1 would be purchased by Fawkham Junction – Railtrack, along with an option to purchase Section 2. 300 185 2003 74 46 Tunnel In return, Railtrack committed to operate the whole London – Southfleet 300 185 2007 39 24 route as well as St Pancras railway station that, unlike Junction all other former British Rail stations, was transferred TOTAL 113 70 to LCR/Union Railways in 1996. Planned: • In 2001, Railtrack announced that, due to financial London – Birmingham 360 225 2025 204 127 (HS2, first section) problems, it would not purchase Section 2 once it was GRAND TOTAL 317 197 complete. This triggered a second restructuring. The 2002 restructuring plan agreed that the two sections Sources: High Speed and the City; High-Speed Rail: The Fast would have different infrastructure owners (Railtrack Track to Economic Development; High-Speed Lines in the for Section 1, LCR for Section 2) but with common World management by Railtrack. 2 | INTERNATIONAL HIGH-SPEED RAIL SYSTEM SUMMARY: UNITED KINGDOM HS2 Network Map with Travel Time Savings To and From London by Train • Following yet further financial problems at Railtrack, tor to HS1 Ltd. for maintaining and operating the railway its interest in the CTRL was sold back to LCR, who infrastructure and three stations: St Pancras International, then sold the operating rights for the completed line Stratford International, and Ebbsfleet International. Euro- to Network Rail, Railtrack’s successor. Under this ar- star is the international train operator and maintains and rangement LCR became the sole owner of both sec- operates the Ashford International Station. Southeastern tions of the CTRL and the St Pancras property, as per provides domestic high-speed rail service along the line the original 1996 plan. between London and Ashford. According to a California High-Speed Rail Authority re- view of international case studies (2011), following a sale High Speed 2 (HS2): Further UK High-Speed Rail process completed in 2010, a new company named HS1 Development Limited (HS1 Ltd.) became the infrastructure operator In January 2009 the Department of Transport formed a and holds the concession to operate, manage, and main- company named HS2 Limited (HS2 Ltd.) to develop plans tain the HS1 high-speed railway infrastructure until 2040. for a new high-speed network between London and Bir- HS1 Ltd. is jointly owned by Borealis Infrastructure and mingham. HS2 Ltd. submitted plans to achieve this con- Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan, two Canadian pension nection, and in January 2012 the UK government ap- funds. They further state that Network Rail is a contrac- proved the recommended route between London and INTERNATIONAL HIGH-SPEED RAIL SYSTEM SUMMARY: UNITED KINGDOM | 3 Eurostar at St Pancras railway station Birmingham. This approved 140-mile segment represents London High-Speed Train Stations Section 1 of the HS2 project. Future plans have the high- The UIC report High Speed and the City documents how speed network connecting to Heathrow International high-speed rail stations relate to city planning and devel- Airport and extending from Birmingham into two seg- opment through a series of case studies. One of the case ments: one to Manchester and the other to Leeds (see the studies examined is London. The London metropolitan map on the previous page). Altogether, the complete ‘Y’ area population is approximately 14 million people, with high-speed rail network extending north of London will the city itself having an estimated population of 7.5 million be around 330 miles in length. Operating at speeds up to people. The population density within the city is calculat- 225 mph, HS2, Ltd. estimates that as many as 4.5 million ed as 4,761 people per square kilometer (12,411 people per air trips and 9 million road trips a year will shift onto rail square mile). For comparison, other city densities include with the ‘Y’ network in place. The government time-line Paris with 1,971 people per square kilometer (5,138 people lists the opening for service along the first section as 2026 per square mile) and Tokyo with a density of 14,254 people and the following segments as 2032-33. per square kilometer (37,158 people per square mile). Sources: High Speed 2: International Case Studies on Deliv- With the opening of Section 2 of HS1 in November 2007, ery and Financing – A Report for HS2; California High-Speed St Pancras International became the high-speed rail sta- Rail Project: International Case Studies; “High Speed Rail”; tion in London. This new route into the city reduced “Key HS2 Facts”; “High Speed Rail: Investing in Britain’s Fu- the travel time by 20 minutes, compared to the previous ture”; The Government’s Decision; Consultation Summary route into London using conventional rail lines, and put the service in a more central location with many connec- RH IDE S IP AND TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM IMPACTS tions. The St Pancras International station is connected to Travel times were greatly reduced with the opening of the 6 London Underground (subway) stations, with more than HS1 line, with traveling from London to Paris now taking 200 Underground stations reached directly without trans- slightly more than 2 hours and to Brussels in slightly less fer.
Recommended publications
  • Rail Accident Report

    Rail Accident Report

    Rail Accident Report Penetration and obstruction of a tunnel between Old Street and Essex Road stations, London 8 March 2013 Report 03/2014 February 2014 This investigation was carried out in accordance with: l the Railway Safety Directive 2004/49/EC; l the Railways and Transport Safety Act 2003; and l the Railways (Accident Investigation and Reporting) Regulations 2005. © Crown copyright 2014 You may re-use this document/publication (not including departmental or agency logos) free of charge in any format or medium. You must re-use it accurately and not in a misleading context. The material must be acknowledged as Crown copyright and you must give the title of the source publication. Where we have identified any third party copyright material you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. This document/publication is also available at www.raib.gov.uk. Any enquiries about this publication should be sent to: RAIB Email: [email protected] The Wharf Telephone: 01332 253300 Stores Road Fax: 01332 253301 Derby UK Website: www.raib.gov.uk DE21 4BA This report is published by the Rail Accident Investigation Branch, Department for Transport. Penetration and obstruction of a tunnel between Old Street and Essex Road stations, London 8 March 2013 Contents Summary 5 Introduction 6 Preface 6 Key definitions 6 The incident 7 Summary of the incident 7 Context 7 Events preceding the incident 9 Events following the incident 11 Consequences of the incident 11 The investigation 12 Sources of evidence 12 Key facts and analysis
  • Signalling on the High-Speed Railway Amsterdam–Antwerp

    Signalling on the High-Speed Railway Amsterdam–Antwerp

    Computers in Railways XI 243 Towards interoperability on Northwest European railway corridors: signalling on the high-speed railway Amsterdam–Antwerp J. H. Baggen, J. M. Vleugel & J. A. A. M. Stoop Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands Abstract The high-speed railway Amsterdam (The Netherlands)–Antwerp (Belgium) is nearly completed. As part of a TEN-T priority project it will connect to major metropolitan areas in Northwest Europe. In many (European) countries, high-speed railways have been built. So, at first sight, the development of this particular high-speed railway should be relatively straightforward. But the situation seems to be more complicated. To run international services full interoperability is required. However, there turned out to be compatibility problems that are mainly caused by the way decision making has taken place, in particular with respect to the choice and implementation of ERTMS, the new European railway signalling system. In this paper major technical and institutional choices, as well as the choice of system borders that have all been made by decision makers involved in the development of the high-speed railway Amsterdam–Antwerp, will be analyzed. This will make it possible to draw some lessons that might be used for future railway projects in Europe and other parts of the world. Keywords: high-speed railway, interoperability, signalling, metropolitan areas. 1 Introduction Two major new railway projects were initiated in the past decade in The Netherlands, the Betuweroute dedicated freight railway between Rotterdam seaport and the Dutch-German border and the high-speed railway between Amsterdam Airport Schiphol and the Dutch-Belgian border to Antwerp (Belgium).
  • Robustness of Railway Rolling Stock Speed Calculation Using Ground Vibration Measurements

    Robustness of Railway Rolling Stock Speed Calculation Using Ground Vibration Measurements

    Heriot-Watt University Research Gateway Robustness of railway rolling stock speed calculation using ground vibration measurements Citation for published version: Kouroussis, G, Connolly, D, Laghrouche, O, Forde, MC, Woodward, PK & Verlinden, O 2015, 'Robustness of railway rolling stock speed calculation using ground vibration measurements', MATEC Web of Conferences, vol. 20, 07002. https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/20152007002 Digital Object Identifier (DOI): 10.1051/matecconf/20152007002 Link: Link to publication record in Heriot-Watt Research Portal Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Published In: MATEC Web of Conferences Publisher Rights Statement: Open access General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via Heriot-Watt Research Portal is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy Heriot-Watt University has made every reasonable effort to ensure that the content in Heriot-Watt Research Portal complies with UK legislation. If you believe that the public display of this file breaches copyright please contact [email protected] providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Download date: 26. Sep. 2021 MATEC Web of Conferences 20, 07002 (2015) DOI: 10.1051/matecconf/20152007002 c Owned by the authors, published by EDP Sciences, 2015 Robustness of railway rolling stock speed calculation using ground vibration measurements Georges Kouroussis1,a, David P. Connolly2,b, Omar Laghrouche2,c, Mike C. Forde3,d, Peter Woodward2,e and Olivier Verlinden1,f 1 University of Mons, Department of Theoretical Mechanics, Dynamics and Vibrations, 31 Boulevard Dolez, 7000 Mons, Belgium 2 Heriot-Watt University, Institute for Infrastructure & Environment, Edinburgh EH14 4AS, UK 3 University of Edinburgh, Institute for Infrastructure and Environment, Alexander Graham Bell Building, Edinburgh EH9 3JF, UK Abstract.
  • Pioneering the Application of High Speed Rail Express Trainsets in the United States

    Pioneering the Application of High Speed Rail Express Trainsets in the United States

    Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 William Barclay Parsons Fellowship Monograph 26 Pioneering the Application of High Speed Rail Express Trainsets in the United States Fellow: Francis P. Banko Professional Associate Principal Project Manager Lead Investigator: Jackson H. Xue Rail Vehicle Engineer December 2012 136763_Cover.indd 1 3/22/13 7:38 AM 136763_Cover.indd 1 3/22/13 7:38 AM Parsons Brinckerhoff 2010 William Barclay Parsons Fellowship Monograph 26 Pioneering the Application of High Speed Rail Express Trainsets in the United States Fellow: Francis P. Banko Professional Associate Principal Project Manager Lead Investigator: Jackson H. Xue Rail Vehicle Engineer December 2012 First Printing 2013 Copyright © 2013, Parsons Brinckerhoff Group Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means—graphic, electronic, mechanical (including photocopying), recording, taping, or information or retrieval systems—without permission of the pub- lisher. Published by: Parsons Brinckerhoff Group Inc. One Penn Plaza New York, New York 10119 Graphics Database: V212 CONTENTS FOREWORD XV PREFACE XVII PART 1: INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH 3 1.1 Unprecedented Support for High Speed Rail in the U.S. ....................3 1.2 Pioneering the Application of High Speed Rail Express Trainsets in the U.S. .....4 1.3 Research Objectives . 6 1.4 William Barclay Parsons Fellowship Participants ...........................6 1.5 Host Manufacturers and Operators......................................7 1.6 A Snapshot in Time .................................................10 CHAPTER 2 HOST MANUFACTURERS AND OPERATORS, THEIR PRODUCTS AND SERVICES 11 2.1 Overview . 11 2.2 Introduction to Host HSR Manufacturers . 11 2.3 Introduction to Host HSR Operators and Regulatory Agencies .
  • Development and Maintenance of Class 395 High-Speed Train for UK High Speed 1

    Development and Maintenance of Class 395 High-Speed Train for UK High Speed 1

    Hitachi Review Vol. 59 (2010), No. 1 39 Development and Maintenance of Class 395 High-speed Train for UK High Speed 1 Toshihiko Mochida OVERVIEW: Hitachi supplied 174 cars to consist of 29 train sets for the Class Naoaki Yamamoto 395 universal AC/DC high-speed trains able to transfer directly between the Kenjiro Goda UK’s existing network and High Speed 1, the country’s first dedicated high- speed railway line. The Class 395 was developed by applying technologies Takashi Matsushita for lighter weight and higher speed developed in Japan to the UK railway Takashi Kamei system based on the A-train concept which features a lightweight aluminum carbody and self-supporting interior module. Hitachi is also responsible for conducting operating trials to verify the reliability and ride comfort of the trains and for providing maintenance services after the trains start operation. The trains, which formally commenced commercial operation in December 2009, are helping to increase the speed of domestic services in Southeast England and it is anticipated that they will have an important role in transporting visitors between venues during the London 2012 Olympic Games. INTRODUCTION for the Eurostar international train which previously HIGH Speed 1 (HS1) is a new 109-km high-speed ran on the UK’s existing railway network. Hitachi railway line linking London to the Channel Tunnel supplied the new Class 395 high-speed train to be able [prior to completion of the whole link, the line was to run on both HS1 and the existing network as part known as the CTRL (Channel Tunnel Rail Link)].
  • The Commercial & Technical Evolution of the Ferry

    The Commercial & Technical Evolution of the Ferry

    THE COMMERCIAL & TECHNICAL EVOLUTION OF THE FERRY INDUSTRY 1948-1987 By William (Bill) Moses M.B.E. A thesis presented to the University of Greenwich in fulfilment of the thesis requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy October 2010 DECLARATION “I certify that this work has not been accepted in substance for any degree, and is not concurrently being submitted for any degree other than that of Doctor of Philosophy being studied at the University of Greenwich. I also declare that this work is the result of my own investigations except where otherwise identified by references and that I have not plagiarised another’s work”. ……………………………………………. William Trevor Moses Date: ………………………………. ……………………………………………… Professor Sarah Palmer Date: ………………………………. ……………………………………………… Professor Alastair Couper Date:……………………………. ii Acknowledgements There are a number of individuals that I am indebted to for their support and encouragement, but before mentioning some by name I would like to acknowledge and indeed dedicate this thesis to my late Mother and Father. Coming from a seafaring tradition it was perhaps no wonder that I would follow but not without hardship on the part of my parents as they struggled to raise the necessary funds for my books and officer cadet uniform. Their confidence and encouragement has since allowed me to achieve a great deal and I am only saddened by the fact that they are not here to share this latest and arguably most prestigious attainment. It is also appropriate to mention the ferry industry, made up on an intrepid band of individuals that I have been proud and privileged to work alongside for as many decades as covered by this thesis.
  • TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Formats

    TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Formats

    STATE OF CALIFORNIA • DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ADA Notice For individuals with sensory disabilities, this document is available in alternate TECHNICAL REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE formats. For alternate format information, contact the Forms Management Unit TR0003 (REV 10/98) at (916) 445-1233, TTY 711, or write to Records and Forms Management, 1120 N Street, MS-89, Sacramento, CA 95814. 1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION NUMBER 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER CA-17-2969 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. REPORT DATE A Comparative Analysis of High Speed Rail Station Development into Destination and/or Multi-use Facilities: The Case of San Jose Diridon February 2017 6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE 7. AUTHOR 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO. Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris Ph.D. / Deike Peters, Ph.D. MTI Report 12-75 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. WORK UNIT NUMBER Mineta Transportation Institute College of Business 3762 San José State University 11. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER San José, CA 95192-0219 65A0499 12. SPONSORING AGENCY AND ADDRESS 13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED California Department of Transportation Final Report Division of Research, Innovation and Systems Information MS-42, PO Box 942873 14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE Sacramento, CA 94273-0001 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 16. ABSTRACT As a burgeoning literature on high-speed rail development indicates, good station-area planning is a very important prerequisite for the eventual successful operation of a high-speed rail station; it can also trigger opportunities for economic development in the station area and the station-city. At the same time, “on the ground” experiences from international examples of high-speed rail stations can provide valuable lessons for the California high-speed rail system in general, and the San Jose Diridon station in particular.
  • Surface Access Integrated Ticketing Report May 2018 1

    Surface Access Integrated Ticketing Report May 2018 1

    SURFACE ACCESS INTEGRATED TICKETING REPORT MAY 2018 1. Contents 1. Executive Summary 3 1.1. Introduction 3 1.2. Methodology 3 1.3. Current Practice 4 1.4. Appetite and Desire 5 1.5. Barriers 5 1.6. Conclusions 6 2. Introduction 7 3. Methodology 8 4. Current Practice 9 4.1. Current Practice within the Aviation Sector in the UK 11 4.2. Experience from Other Modes in the UK 15 4.3. International Comparisons 20 5. Appetite and Desire 25 5.1. Industry Appetite Findings 25 5.2. Passenger Appetite Findings 26 5.3. Passenger Appetite Summary 30 6. Barriers 31 6.1. Commercial 32 6.2. Technological 33 6.3. Regulatory 34 6.4. Awareness 35 6.5. Cultural/Behavioural 36 7. Conclusions 37 8. Appendix 1 – About the Authors 39 9. Appendix 2 – Bibliography 40 10. Appendix 3 – Distribution & Integration Methods 43 PAGE 2 1. Executive Summary 1.1. Introduction This report examines air-to-surface access integrated ticketing in support of one of the Department for Transport’s (DfT) six policy objectives in the proposed new avia- tion strategy – “Helping the aviation industry work for its customers”. Integrated Ticketing is defined as the incorporation of one ticket that includes sur- face access to/from an airport and the airplane ticket itself using one transaction. Integrated ticketing may consider surface access journeys both to the origin airport and from the destination airport. We recognise that some of the methods of inte- grated ticketing might not be truly integrated (such as selling rail or coach tickets on board the flight), but such examples were included in the report to reflect that these exist and that the customer experience in purchasing is relatively seamless.
  • High Speed Rail

    High Speed Rail

    House of Commons Transport Committee High Speed Rail Tenth Report of Session 2010–12 Volume III Additional written evidence Ordered by the House of Commons to be published 24 May, 7, 14, 21 and 28 June, 12 July, 6, 7 and 13 September and 11 October 2011 Published on 8 November 2011 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited The Transport Committee The Transport Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Department for Transport and its Associate Public Bodies. Current membership Mrs Louise Ellman (Labour/Co-operative, Liverpool Riverside) (Chair) Steve Baker (Conservative, Wycombe) Jim Dobbin (Labour/Co-operative, Heywood and Middleton) Mr Tom Harris (Labour, Glasgow South) Julie Hilling (Labour, Bolton West) Kwasi Kwarteng (Conservative, Spelthorne) Mr John Leech (Liberal Democrat, Manchester Withington) Paul Maynard (Conservative, Blackpool North and Cleveleys) Iain Stewart (Conservative, Milton Keynes South) Graham Stringer (Labour, Blackley and Broughton) Julian Sturdy (Conservative, York Outer) The following were also members of the committee during the Parliament. Angie Bray (Conservative, Ealing Central and Acton) Lilian Greenwood (Labour, Nottingham South) Kelvin Hopkins (Labour, Luton North) Gavin Shuker (Labour/Co-operative, Luton South) Angela Smith (Labour, Penistone and Stocksbridge) Powers The committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the internet via www.parliament.uk. Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House.
  • Economic Impact of High Speed 1 Final Report

    Economic Impact of High Speed 1 Final Report

    Economic Impact of High Speed 1 Final report London & Continental Railways January 2009 In association with Economic Impact of High Speed 1 Final report Project No: 149231 January 2009 10 Eastbourne Terrace, London, W2 6LG Telephone: 020 7053 1300 Fax: 020 7053 1301 Email : [email protected] Prepared by: Approved by: ____________________________________________ ____________________________________________ Kieran Arter Paul Buchanan Status: Final Issue no: 2 Date: 08 January 2009 149231 draft report v4.1.doc (C) Copyright Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited. All rights reserved. This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the commissioning party and unless otherwise agreed in writing by Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited, no other party may copy, reproduce, distribute, make use of, or rely on the contents of the report. No liability is accepted by Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited for any use of this report, other than for the purposes for which it was originally prepared and provided. Opinions and information provided in this report are on the basis of Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited using due skill, care and diligence in the preparation of the same and no explicit warranty is provided as to their accuracy. It should be noted and is expressly stated that no independent verification of any of the documents or information supplied to Colin Buchanan and Partners Limited has been made Economic Impact of High Speed 1 Final report Contents Summary 1 1 Introduction 4 2 Transport user benefits 5 2.1 Journey time savings
  • The Regional Impact of the Channel Tunnel Throughout the Community

    The Regional Impact of the Channel Tunnel Throughout the Community

    -©fine Channel Tunnel s throughpdrth^Çpmmunity European Commission European Union Regional Policy and Cohesion Regional development studies The regional impact of the Channel Tunnel throughout the Community European Commission Already published in the series Regional development studies 01 — Demographic evolution in European regions (Demeter 2015) 02 — Socioeconomic situation and development of the regions in the neighbouring countries of the Community in Central and Eastern Europe 03 — Les politiques régionales dans l'opinion publique 04 — Urbanization and the functions of cities in the European Community 05 — The economic and social impact of reductions in defence spending and military forces on the regions of the Community 06 — New location factors for mobile investment in Europe 07 — Trade and foreign investment in the Community regions: the impact of economic reform in Central and Eastern Europe 08 — Estudio prospectivo de las regiones atlánticas — Europa 2000 Study of prospects in the Atlantic regions — Europe 2000 Étude prospective des régions atlantiques — Europe 2000 09 — Financial engineering techniques applying to regions eligible under Objectives 1, 2 and 5b 10 — Interregional and cross-border cooperation in Europe 11 — Estudio prospectivo de las regiones del Mediterráneo Oeste Évolution prospective des régions de la Méditerranée - Ouest Evoluzione delle prospettive delle regioni del Mediterraneo occidentale 12 — Valeur ajoutée et ingénierie du développement local 13 — The Nordic countries — what impact on planning and development
  • The Uk's Privatisation Experiment

    The Uk's Privatisation Experiment

    THE UK’S PRIVATISATION EXPERIMENT: THE P ASSAGE OF TIME PERMITS A SOBER ASSESSMENT DAVID PARKER CESIFO WORKING PAPER NO. 1126 CATEGORY 9: INDUSTRIAL ORGANISATION FEBRUARY 2004 PRESENTED AT CESIFO CONFERENCE ON PRIVATISATION EXPERIENCES IN THE EU NOVEMBER 2003 An electronic version of the paper may be downloaded • from the SSRN website: www.SSRN.com • from the CESifo website: www.CESifo.de CESifo Working Paper No. 1126 THE UK’S PRIVATISATION EXPERIMENT: THE PASSAGE OF TIME PERMITS A SOBER ASSESSMENT Abstract This chapter looks at the UK’s privatisation experiment, which began from the late 1970s. It considers the background to the UK’s privatisations, which industries were privatised and how, and summarises the results of studies of performance changes in privatised companies in the UK. It looks at the relative roles of competition, regulation and ownership changes in determining performance improvement. It concludes by looking at the wider lessons that might be learned from the UK’s privatisation experiment, including the importance of developing competitive markets and, in their absence, effective regulatory regimes. Keywords: UK, privatisation, competition regulation, lessons. JEL Classification: L33, H82, L51. David Parker Cranfield University School of Management Cranfield Bedfordshire MK43 0AL United Kingdom [email protected] Introduction The Labour Government of 1974-79 arranged the sale of some of the state’s shareholding in the petroleum company BP. However, this sale was dictated by budgetary pressures and did not reflect a belief within government that state industries should be privatised. Indeed, the same Labour Government took into state ownership two major industries, namely aerospace and shipbuilding.